applied

sciences
Article
Design and Simulation of the Robust ABS and ESP
Fuzzy Logic Controller on the Complex
Braking Maneuvers
Andrei Aksjonov 1,2, *, Klaus Augsburg 2 and Valery Vodovozov 1
1 Faculty of Power Engineering, Tallinn University of Technology, Tallinn 12616, Estonia;
valery.vodovozov@ttu.ee
2 Department of Mechanical Engineering, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Ilmenau 98693, Germany;
klaus.augsburg@tu-ilmenau.de
* Correspondence: andrei.aksjonov@ttu.ee; Tel.: +49-157-8899-8333

Academic Editor: Arun Somani

Received: 5 September 2016; Accepted: 17 November 2016; Published: 25 November 2016

Abstract: Automotive driving safety systems such as an anti-lock braking system (ABS) and an
electronic stability program (ESP) assist drivers in controlling the vehicle to avoid road accidents.
In this paper, ABS and the ESP, based on the fuzzy logic theory, are integrated for vehicle stability
control in complex braking maneuvers. The proposed control algorithm is implemented for a sport
utility vehicle (SUV) and investigated for braking on different surfaces. The results obtained for the
vehicle software simulator confirm the robustness of the developed control strategy for a variety of
road profiles and surfaces.

Keywords: energy-efficient computing; fuzzy control; high-performance computer systems;

road vehicles; vehicle safety

1. Introduction
The rapidly growing demand for passenger and commercial vehicles increases the number of
road accidents around the world. In addition to their negative influence on road safety, accidents
also have an indirect harmful impact on the environment and cause threats to human health and life.
In cases when the human factor plays an important role, modern electronics and control systems may
support the driver’s reaction and skills to improve the stability and performance of the vehicle and
avoid accidents. Two of the most important on-board safety systems are ABS and ESP. Both systems
have become mandatory for all passenger vehicles and most commercial vehicles. The ABS and ESP
safety features in vehicle dynamics control have been known for a long time. However, the existing
control algorithms are rarely investigated from the viewpoint of robust operation in different road
conditions. Many of the results discussed in the published studies are describing simple maneuvers,
such as straight-line braking with a uniform road surface. Few investigations are known for emergency
braking on complex road profiles, such as a curved road with split-µ or a curved road with varying
tire–road friction coefficients.
Within the framework of the presented study, fuzzy theory has been selected for the controller
implementation. The fuzzy logic controllers (FLC) are known as efficient tools in solving complex
tasks such as ABS and ESP control. A combination of ABS and ESP can solve the robustness problem
of the braking performance. To confirm it, the FLC-based braking will be discussed for the different
complex maneuvers such as a combination of road profiles and split-µ road surfaces.
The first ABS applications arose several decades ago [1] and still use rule-based methods as
the dominant control approach. In the modern ABS systems installed in commercial vehicles, the

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382; doi:10.3390/app6120382 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 2 of 18

braking pressure is increased or reduced based on the wheel speed and the slip switching threshold
comparison [1]. The slip is set to a constant value, for instance 20% as it is optimal for the most
common surface—dry asphalt. The braking surface is not recognized and the threshold value is
equal for every road condition. This approach leads to energy losses because each road adhesive
characteristic requires its optimal wheel slip value. This is why many researchers have focused on
intelligent control algorithms for braking processes, trying to estimate an optimal one for every road
condition slip threshold.
However, the analysis of the bibliography presented in [2] shows that nowadays the FLC is
also being intensively used in ABS and ESP design. One of the first ABS control mechanisms based
on the fuzzy algorithm was patented in 1989 by the Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., (Yokohama, Japan) [3].
Furthermore, many other solutions based on the FLC were proposed. Thanks to its simplicity and
robustness, FLC proved to be equally applicable to on-road [4] and off-road vehicles [5].
In [6], a model reference adaptive control (MRAC) was introduced to tune the FLC in order to be
able to control all kinds of nonlinear systems. Furthermore, the MRAC was used in a braking system
in [7] as an ABS intelligent control. The simulation results were shown for a variety of road conditions
(from icy to wet). The proposed solution requires a reference slip value, which is set to 20% for any kind
of road surface. A similar assumption for the constant value of the optimal wheel slip is also proposed
for ABS, as described in [8]. Another example is the model-based Takagi–Sugeno (T–S) FLC designed
for a single-car model [9]. The controller copes well in optimal braking wheel slip maintenance, which
the model considers a reference constant. Many different fuzzy proportional-integral-derivative (PID)
approaches were also investigated [10–12]. Yet the results are limited because the situation considered
in most cases is braking on a straight road with an optimal slip of 20%.
Adaptive and self-tuning intelligent FLC solutions have also been introduced in various
studies [13,14]. In [15] a genetic neural FLC is designed, where the algorithm requires the reference
wheel slip profile. The approach with the estimation of road parameters is used in [16], where various
roads can be identified to keep the optimal slip by the controller. This controller demonstrated good
performance but its operation was illustrated for simple straight braking maneuvers.
Many studies have presented the validation of fuzzy-based ABS algorithms through tests on a
hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) experimental setup or ABS test bench connected to the real-time vehicle
software simulator. For example, in [17] the authors introduced the fuzzy ABS with the road friction
estimation algorithm. Consequently, the experiments were conducted for the variable road conditions
proving the FLC robustness. In [18] the ABS algorithm holds the optimal wheel slip for different roads
and is validated for quarter-car HIL systems.
For complex braking maneuvers on split-µ surfaces and curved roads the activation of the
ESP system can be required. In this field, fuzzy logic methods are also finding wide application.
For example, patents have been issued to FLC control algorithm, where yaw rate and steering wheel
angle signals were considered the control inputs to maintain vehicle stability during braking [19].
Nevertheless, the described controller is still P or PD FLC, which requires the reference input.
In addition, many known examples are validated for specific maneuvers only. In particular, the
PID FLC for yaw motion control [20,21] was investigated on double line maneuvers. The FLC neural
network [22] shows the experimentation results conducted for split-µ straight road maneuvers. The T–S
FLC [23] and fuzzy robust H∞ [24] methods were tested on line change maneuvers. The authors in [25]
have integrated yaw moment and active front steering controllers based on the FLC. The results are
demonstrated by the single line change maneuvers.
It should be noted that the use of simple maneuvers for the controller validation cannot
demonstrate the FLC robustness. In reality, the driver deals with different road scenarios. Therefore,
the controller applicability has to be studied on more complex and different braking maneuvers
such as emergency braking on curved split-µ or variable road surfaces to assure controller robustness.
Moreover, the reference slip direct control does not guarantee safety assistance on the split-µ surfaces
as the steerability is not preserved. This issue must also be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 3 of 18

As suggested in many previous studies, controllers as well as the currently installed systems in
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382  3 of 17 
the vehicles set the slip value at 20% for any kind of roads. On the one hand, such an approach can be
enough to maintain the steering ability. On the other hand, it leads to a decline in braking performance.
be  enough  to  maintain  the  steering  ability.  On  the  other  hand,  it  leads  to  a  decline  in  braking 
For example, on average the optimal slip for icy roads is between 7% and 10%. Thus λ = 20% would
performance. For example, on average the optimal slip for icy roads is between 7% and 10%. Thus λ 
cause a more than 50% loss of braking performance and the vehicle operation would become unstable,
= 20% would cause a more than 50% loss of braking performance and the vehicle operation would 
i.e., a diminution in steerability. Therefore, by holding the optimal wheel slip value and avoiding the
become unstable, i.e. a diminution in steerability. Therefore, by holding the optimal wheel slip value 
controller restriction with reference variable, as it is proposed in the current paper, the effectiveness
and avoiding the controller restriction with reference variable, as it is proposed in the current paper, 
and energy efficiency of the braking process is maintained [1] (pp. 74–94).
the effectiveness and energy efficiency of the braking process is maintained [1] (pp. 74–94). 
This paper contributes to the advancement of ABS and brake-based ESP systems using FLC.
This paper contributes to the advancement of ABS and brake‐based ESP systems using FLC. In 
In particular, the article describes the research results connected with the following topics:
particular, the article describes the research results connected with the following topics: 
• ESP and ABS control combination, both designed using fuzzy theory.
 ESP and ABS control combination, both designed using fuzzy theory. 
• Use of a 10 degrees-of-freedom (10 DOF) four-wheel vehicle model in the controller.
Use of a 10 degrees‐of‐freedom (10 DOF) four‐wheel vehicle model in the controller. 
• Demonstration of the control robustness on different road surfaces and profiles.
Demonstration of the control robustness on different road surfaces and profiles. 
The paper is organized as follows. The next section is dedicated to vehicle dynamics and model
The paper is organized as follows. The next section is dedicated to vehicle dynamics and model 
parameterization. Section 3 explains the FLC design. The Section 4 is devoted to the experimental
parameterization. Section 3 explains the FLC design. The Section 4 is devoted to the experimental 
facilities. Next, the simulation outcomes are provided. Conclusions are summarized in Section 6.
facilities. Next, the simulation outcomes are provided. Conclusions are summarized in Section 6. 

2. Vehicle Dynamics
2. Vehicle Dynamics 
2.1. Vehicle Model
2.1. Vehicle Model 
The single-wheel model of the vehicle is shown in Figure 1a. The single-track (bicycle) model
The single‐wheel model of the vehicle is shown in Figure 1a. The single‐track (bicycle) model is 
is introduced in Figure 1b. Table 1 introduces nomenclature for all variables used in these and other
introduced in Figure 1b. Table 1 introduces nomenclature for all variables used in these and other 
models mentioned in the paper.
models mentioned in the paper. 

 
(a)  (b) 
Figure 1. Vehicle model schematic drawing: (a) single‐wheel model; (b) single‐track model. 
Figure 1. Vehicle model schematic drawing: (a) single-wheel model; (b) single-track model.

Single wheel dynamics can be expressed by the following equations: 
Single wheel dynamics can be expressed by the following equations:
I wi  
 i  Tti  ri  Fxi  Tbi   (1)
.
Iwi · ωi = Tti − ri · Fxi − Tbi (1)
Fxi  m  v. xi   (2)
Fxi = m · v xi (2)

FF  m  g .  (3)
zizi= m · g. (3)
Brake torque depends on the applied brake pressure: 
Brake torque depends on the applied brake pressure:
Tbi  ri  kb  pbi ,  (4)
Tbi = ri · k b · pbi , (4)
where  kb  is  the  braking  coefficient,  which  depends  on  the  brake  disc  friction  area,  mechanical 
where kb is the braking coefficient, which depends on the brake disc friction area, mechanical efficiency
efficiency of the brake components, and the braking factor is the constant value. In this paper, the 
of the brake components, and the braking factor is the constant value. In this
ABS controller output variable is the braking pressure for each wheel, p bi.  paper, the ABS controller
output variable is the braking pressure for each wheel, pbi .
The wheel slip at braking is calculated as follows: 
vv  vwx _ i
i  .  (5)
vv

The longitudinal wheel speed be can also simply calculated as: 
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 4 of 18

The wheel slip at braking is calculated as follows:

vv − vwx_i
λi = . (5)
vv

The longitudinal wheel speed be can also simply calculated as:

vwx_i = ri · ωi . (6)

Table 1. Parameters description.

Symbol Description Annotation

ω Wheel angular speed 1 rad/s
avx Vehicle longitudinal acceleration 1 m/s2
avy Vehicle lateral acceleration 1 m/s2
ψ Yaw rate 1 rad/s
δ Steering wheel angle 1 rad
pb Braking pressure 1 bar
r Wheel radius m
m Mass of the vehicle g
g Gravitational acceleration m/s2
Tb Braking torque Nm
Tt Traction torque Nm
kb Braking coefficient -
vvx Vehicle longitudinal velocity m/s
vwx Wheel longitudinal velocity m/s
λi Wheel slip %
µ Tire–road friction coefficient (general) -
Tire–road friction coefficient based on vehicle
µx -
longitudinal acceleration
Distance from the vehicle Center of Gravity
lf m
(COG) to the front axles
lr Distance from the vehicle COG to the rear axles m
Iz Yaw moment of inertia about z-axis g·m2
Fx Longitudinal force N
Fy Lateral force N
Fz Vertical force N
pABS Pressure generated for ABS braking bar
Pressure generated for the yaw rate regulation for
pESPl bar
the left side wheels of the vehicle
Pressure generated for the yaw rate regulation for
pESPr bar
the right side wheels of the vehicle
s Distance m
−aaverage Average deceleration m/s2
ABSIP ABS operation index of performance -
λaverage Average wheel slip value %
ωp-t-p ABS adaptability peak-to-peak value %
i Subscript for each wheel; i  [FL, FR, RL, RR] 2 -
1 Measured by the sensor; 2 (Front Left, Front Right, Rear Left, Rear Right).

In reality the tire radius ri is a dynamic variable. In our case we simplify the equation and consider
it as a constant value as the change in radius dimension is negligibly small.
The FLC design requires information about the friction-slip curves. Tire–road friction coefficient
can be determined as follows:
Fx
µ x (λ) = . (7)
Fz
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 5 of 18

Using Equations (2) and (3), µx can be estimated:

.
vx
µx ≈ . (8)
g

The 3 DOF single-track model, 0b, is required for the formulation of control inputs in the case of
vehicle maneuvers with lateral dynamics. The model is described by the following system of equations:
 .
 m · avx = Fx f · cosδ + Fxr − Fy f · sinδ + m · y. · ψ

m · avy = Fx f· sinδ + Fy f · cosδ + Fyr
−m·x·ψ . (9)
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382   ψ. · I = l F · sinδ + F · cosδ − l · F

5 of 17 
z f xf yf r yr

2.2. Model and Controller Parameterization 
2.2. Model and Controller Parameterization
Before the simulation, the vehicle model is parameterized according to the sport‐utility vehicle. 
Before the simulation, the vehicle model is parameterized according to the sport-utility vehicle.
The parameters are taken from the vehicle manufacturer. The total mass is 2170.39 kg. The tires for 
The parameters are taken from the vehicle manufacturer. The total mass is 2170.39 kg. The tires for
each wheel are set Continental
each
® (Hanover, Germany) 235/55 R19 and are modeled with Pacejka’s tire 
wheel are set Continental® (Hanover, Germany) 235/55 R19 and are modeled with Pacejka’s tire
magic formula, the coefficients are also provided by the tire manufacturer. 
magic formula, the coefficients are also provided by the tire manufacturer.
In order to set the initial parameterization of the FLCs, a specific case study was conducted first. 
In order to set the initial parameterization of the FLCs, a specific case study was conducted first.
The model was simulated under heavy braking conditions on different surfaces to obtain the wheel 
The model was simulated under heavy braking conditions on different surfaces to obtain the wheel
lock. The ABS and ESP control was not activated. During the case study simulation, the normalized 
lock. The ABS and ESP control was not activated. During the case study simulation, the normalized
traction/braking forces for every road condition with the locked wheels were evaluated. Therefore, 
traction/braking forces for every road condition with the locked wheels were evaluated. Therefore,
the curves of the normalized traction/braking force of the tire μ versus the wheel slip λ for different 
the curves of the normalized traction/braking force of the tire µ versus the wheel slip λ for different
road surfaces were built (Figure 2). 
road surfaces were built (Figure 2).

 
Figure 2. The µ versus λ curves for the different road surfaces for the studied vehicle model: 1—dry
Figure 2. The μ versus λ curves for the different road surfaces for the studied vehicle model: 
road rear wheels, 2—dry
1—dry  road  road
rear  front 2—dry 
wheels,  wheels,road 
3—damp
front road rear3—damp 
wheels,  wheels, 4—damp road front4—damp 
road  rear wheels,  wheels,
5—wet road rear wheels, 6—wet road front wheels, 7—icy road rear wheels, 8—icy road front wheels.
road  front  wheels,  5—wet  road  rear  wheels,  6—wet  road  front  wheels,  7—icy  road  rear 
wheels, 8—icy road front wheels. 
The stable area is where the curve grows from 0 by λ to its maximum value of µ. The second
part ofThe stable area is where the curve grows from 0 by λ to its maximum value of μ. The second 
the curve is the unstable region, when the steering remains uncontrollable. Efficient ABS
part  of  the  curve 
performance dependsis  the  unstable 
on the region, Each
road surface. when  the  steering 
surface remains 
(dry, damp, wet,uncontrollable. 
icy) has its ownEfficient 
optimal ABS 
slip
performance depends on the road surface. Each surface (dry, damp, wet, icy) has its own optimal 
while braking. The optimal slip refers to the top area of the curve where µ obtains its maximum value
slip while braking. The optimal slip refers to the top area of the curve where μ obtains its maximum 
during braking (Figure 2), thus remaining stable. The optimal slip values for each curve, according to
value 
the during 
plots braking 
in Figure 2, are(Figure  2), in
presented thus  remaining 
Table 2. stable.  The  optimal  slip  values  for  each  curve, 
according to the plots in Figure 2, are presented in Table 2. 

Table 2. Optimal wheel slip values for several road conditions. 

λ (%)  Front Wheels Rear Wheels

Dry road surface 19.85  18.96 
Damp road surface 17.53  14.65 
Wet road surface 13.21  10.88 
Icy road surface  8.95  7.55 
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 6 of 18

Table 2. Optimal wheel slip values for several road conditions.

λ (%) Front Wheels Rear Wheels

Dry road surface 19.85 18.96
Damp road surface 17.53 14.65
Wet road surface 13.21 10.88
Icy road surface 8.95 7.55

The plots are important for the FLC universe of discourse (UOD) design, to set the workspace
for the slip input variables in order to guarantee the controller robustness. During the case study the
workspace for friction coefficient was also investigated. In addition, the yaw rate UOD was explored
in the case study for emergency braking.
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382  6 of 17 
3. Fuzzy Logic Control Design
When the dynamical behavior of the object is studied, the controller is ready to be designed. 
When the dynamical behavior of the object is studied, the controller is ready to be designed.
One of the advantages of the solution described in this paper is that the controller requires the input 
One of the advantages of the solution described in this paper is that the controller requires the input
variables, for which signals are transmitted in real time by the sensors available in modern vehicles. 
variables, for which signals are transmitted in real time by the sensors available in modern vehicles.
The fuzzy logic controller architecture is shown in Figure 3. In this case the plant is a vehicle 
The fuzzy logic controller architecture is shown in Figure 3. In this case the plant is a vehicle
model. The FLC consists of four design steps. Fuzzification is the process of converting the “crisp” 
model. The FLC consists of four design steps. Fuzzification is the process of converting the “crisp”
(real number) input into fuzzy sets. A fuzzy set in turn is a pair consisting of an element in UOD and 
(real number) input into fuzzy sets. A fuzzy set in turn is a pair consisting of an element in UOD and
membership degree. The inference mechanism (engine) is used to turn the fuzzy input into a fuzzy 
membership degree. The inference mechanism (engine) is used to turn the fuzzy input into a fuzzy
output, using the composed rule‐base block. Finally, defuzzification converts the fuzzy output into a 
output, using the composed rule-base block. Finally, defuzzification converts the fuzzy output into a
numerical value. 
numerical value.

 
Figure 3.Figure 3. Fuzzy logic controller system block diagram: r(t)—reference input, u(t)—process 
Fuzzy logic controller system block diagram: r(t)—reference input, u(t)—process inputs,
inputs, y(t)—process. 
y(t)—process.

The  MATLAB® ®  (Natick,  MA,  USA)  Fuzzy  Logic  Toolbox™  is  used  to  design  the  FLC.  At  the 
The MATLAB (Natick, MA, USA) Fuzzy Logic Toolbox™ is used to design the FLC. At the
beginning,  the  inputs  and  outputs  must  be  stated.  Two  separate  FLCs  for  ABS  and  ESP  are 
beginning, the inputs and outputs must be stated. Two separate FLCs for ABS and ESP are introduced
introduced and combined to obtain robust brake and stability control. 
and combined to obtain robust brake and stability control.
The  block  diagram  scheme  for  a  single  wheel  is  presented  in  Figure  4.  The  anti‐lock  braking 
The block diagram scheme for a single wheel is presented in Figure 4. The anti-lock braking
system controller involves longitudinal wheel speeds and vehicle acceleration. Using Equations (5) 
system controller involves longitudinal wheel speeds and vehicle acceleration. Using Equations (5)
and (6), the slip for each wheel λi is calculated and the variable serves as an input. The second input 
and (6), the slip for each wheel λi is calculated and the variable serves as an input. The second input is
is  the  tire–road  friction  coefficient,  which  corresponds  to  the  vehicle  body  acceleration  and  is 
the tire–road friction coefficient, which corresponds to the vehicle body acceleration and is donated as
donated as μx, as stated in Equation (8). 
µx , as stated in Equation (8).
The ABS is activated together with the braking pedal displacement. When the vehicle velocity is
lower than 8 km/h, the ABS does not function because, after the vehicle speed of 8 km/h, the distance
traveled with locked wheels is not critical. The activation requirements are taken from [1] (pp. 74–94).
introduced and combined to obtain robust brake and stability control. 
The  block  diagram  scheme  for  a  single  wheel  is  presented  in  Figure  4.  The  anti‐lock  braking 
system controller involves longitudinal wheel speeds and vehicle acceleration. Using Equations (5) 
and (6), the slip for each wheel λi is calculated and the variable serves as an input. The second input 
is  the  tire–road  friction  coefficient,  which  corresponds  to  the  vehicle  body  acceleration  and 
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382
is 
7 of 18
donated as μx, as stated in Equation (8). 

 
Figure 4. Controller block scheme for a single wheel: ABS FLC—anti‐lock braking system 
Figure 4. Controller block scheme for a single wheel: ABS FLC—anti-lock braking system fuzzy logic
controller,fuzzy  logic  controller, 
ESP FLC—electronic ESP  FLC—electronic 
stability stability 
program fuzzy logic program 
controller, fuzzy  logic  operation.
1/s—integrational controller, 
1/s—integrational operation. 
As soon as the emergency brake (full pedal actuation) is deployed, before the ABS is activated,
The ABS is activated together with the braking pedal displacement. When the vehicle velocity is 
the controller has enough time to measure the car’s maximum deceleration and use it as a constant
greater  than  8  km/h,  the  ABS  does  not  function  because,  after  the  vehicle  speed  of  8  km/h,  the 
variable to understand the road surface. Moreover, the controller resets the µx variable every second
distance traveled with locked wheels is not critical. The activation requirements are taken from [1] 
and the maximum value of avx is measured again. The fast reset has no effect on driving comfort as
(pp. 74–94). 
the process is very rapid. The reset is necessary for the FLC to understand if the road condition has
remained the same, for example, when the road changes from a dry to an icy surface.
The inputs of the ESP are the angular velocity of the vehicle about the vertical axis ψ and the
steering wheel angle δ operated by the driver (Figure 4). The ESP is activated together with the braking
pedal and deactivates when the vehicle speed is below 8 km/h.
The output of the ABS and the ESP is the braking pressure. The yaw controller has no impact
when the yaw moment is not created, thus only ABS is responsible for efficient braking on a straight
homogeneous road.
The ESP FLC controls both sides of the vehicle. It either regulates the right or left pair of the
vehicle wheels, depending on the body yaw rate direction. According to the curves in Figure 2, the
front and rear wheels require different optimal wheel slip values. Therefore, the front and rear wheels
will have different membership functions (MFs) for the λ input in ABS. Consequently, each wheel has a
different controller. When the yaw FLC understands that the driver is losing vehicle control, it reduces
the braking pressure from the side of the car, in which direction the vehicle starts to spin around its
center of gravity (COG). Otherwise, only the ABS control is operating.
The next step is to design membership functions for all the inputs and outputs (Figure 5).
The linear (triangular) MFs were applied, which are characterized by fast reaction due to the narrow
shape as compared to other MFs (exponential, quadratics).
The MFs are symmetrical to provide an equal sensitivity for the whole UOD and obtain the
whole overlap of the UOD between the MFs. Each variable UOD must have a closed frontier between
[min, max]. For the input variables, the bounds are obtained during the parameterization described in
Section 2.
The slip input MFs for the ABS are introduced in Figure 5. There are nine MFs in total. The UOD
for the front wheels lay between [0.08, 0.22]. This area is accepted according to the operational space
obtained in Figure 2 for the front wheels. The only difference between the front and the rear wheels is
that the UOD of the slip input for the last ones is accepted in a range [0.07, 0.2], which is also based on
the rear slip curves in Figure 2 for the rear wheels. In short, UOD for the slip covers all stable areas for
relevant roads.
control, it reduces the braking pressure from the side of the car, in which direction the vehicle starts 
to spin around its center of gravity (COG). Otherwise, only the ABS control is operating. 
The next step is to design membership functions for all the inputs and outputs (Figure 5). The 
linear  (triangular)  MFs  were  applied,  which  are  characterized  by  fast  reaction  due  to  the  narrow 
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 8 of 18
shape as compared to other MFs (exponential, quadratics). 

 
FigureFigure 5. Fuzzy logic controller membership functions: (a) ABS λ input; (b) ABS μ
5. Fuzzy logic controller membership functions: (a) ABS λ input; (b) ABS µx input;x input; (c) 
(c) ESP
ESP ψ input; (d) ESP δ input; (e) ABS p
ψ input; (d) ESP δ input; (e) ABS pABS output; (f)
ABS  output; (f) ESP p
ESP pESPl and pESPrESPl  and pESPr outputs. 
outputs.

The  MFs 
The are  symmetrical 
µx MFs are plotted into  provide 
Figure an  equal 
5b. The sensitivity  for  the 
UOD parameterization waswhole  UOD 
obtained and  obtain 
during the 
the case
whole  overlap 
study. The µx of  the  UOD 
operational between 
space the  MFs. 
is bounded Each 
between variable 
[10, 40]. UOD  must  have  a  closed  frontier 
between [min, max]. For the input variables, the bounds are obtained during the parameterization 
The first input of the ESP FLC is the yaw rate. The state consists of nine MFs; UOD is limited in
described in Section 2. 
the range between [−4, 4] and introduced in Figure 5c. The reason behind the range for the UOD is
The slip input MFs for the ABS are introduced in Figure 5. There are nine MFs in total. The UOD 
next: when the angular velocity exceeds 4 rad/s and the steering wheel angle change is not conducted,
for the front wheels lay between [0.08, 0.22]. This area is accepted according to the operational space 
vehicle spin appears and the driver is no longer able to act on lateral control.
obtained in Figure 2 for the front wheels. The only difference between the front and the rear wheels 
The second input of the ESP steering wheel angle MFs is shown in Figure 5d. Like the first input,
it has nine symmetrically dispelled MFs that are normalized between [−180, 180]. It is assumed that
driver reaction in extreme situation must be limited to half of one full steering wheel turn to each side,
left or right, which gives in total 360◦ .
The maximum pressure of the braking system for the studied case is 151 bar. The UOD for the
output pressure variables (Figure 5e) is therefore located between [0, 151] and consists of eight MFs.
The FLC decides how many bars shall be provided to obtain an optimal slip. Finally, the pressure
output for the ESP is obtained in Figure 5f. Likewise, for the ABS the UOD lay between [0, 151].
The ESP has two outputs (Figure 4): brake pressure for the left and the right sides. The decision of
which side of the vehicle to control is determined by the rule-base operator.
The modus ponens (If–Then) form has been used in this paper for the rule-base design.
The multiple input, single output (MISO) form of the linguistic rules for ABS is (taken from [6]):

If u1 is Aj 1 and u2 is Ak 2 . . . Then yq is Bp q , (10)

where u1 and u2 denote the FLC inputs wheel slip and road condition, respectively; yq denotes the brake
pressure; Aj 1 and Ak 2 relate to the jth and kth linguistic value associated with λ and µx , respectively;
and Bp q is the linguistic value of the output braking pressure.
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 9 of 18

Linguistic values for the ABS are expressed in Table 3. There are 54 rules for the ABS control in
total. The rule base for the ESP is observable in Table 4. It has a multi input, multi output (MIMO)
structure. In total, 81 rules are required to control the state. The controlled side of the vehicle depends
on the yaw moment direction from the center line of the car.

Table 3. Fuzzy linguistic rules for the ABS control.

λ
MF1 MF2 MF3 MF4 MF5 MF6 MF7 MF8 MF9
µx
MF1 MF2 MF1 MF1 MF1 MF1 MF1 MF1 MF1 MF1
MF2 MF4 MF3 MF2 MF1 MF1 MF1 MF1 MF1 MF1
MF3 MF6 MF5 MF4 MF3 MF2 MF1 MF1 MF1 MF1
MF4 MF8 MF7 MF6 MF5 MF4 MF3 MF2 MF1 MF1
MF5 MF8 MF8 MF8 MF7 MF6 MF5 MF3 MF1 MF1
MF6 MF8 MF8 MF8 MF8 MF8 MF7 MF5 MF3 MF1

Table 4. Fuzzy linguistic rules for the ESP regulation: blue—left side of the vehicle, black—right side
of the vehicle.

ψ
MF1 MF2 MF3 MF4 MF5 MF6 MF7 MF8 MF9
δ
MF1
MF1 MF2 MF2 MF3 MF3 MF4 MF4 MF5 MF5
MF1
MF1
MF2 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF3 MF3 MF4 MF4 MF5
MF1
MF1
MF3 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF3 MF3 MF4 MF4
MF1
MF1
MF4 MF3 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF3 MF3 MF4
MF1
MF1
MF5 MF3 MF3 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF3 MF3
MF1
MF1
MF6 MF4 MF3 MF3 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF3
MF1
MF1
MF7 MF4 MF4 MF3 MF3 MF2 MF2 MF2 MF2
MF1
MF1
MF8 MF5 MF4 MF4 MF3 MF3 MF2 MF2 MF2
MF1
MF1
MF9 MF5 MF5 MF4 MF4 MF3 MF3 MF2 MF2
MF1

For further fuzzy inference, Mamdani’s method is applied in this paper. The last step in every
FLC design is the defuzzification procedure. Relying on experience and due to the good computational
complexity, the ABS is defuzzified by the centroid and the ESP by the smallest-of-maxima methods.
When all the design steps are finished, the rule base FLC can be expressed in a three-dimensional
surface form. The ABS FLC for the front wheels is presented in Figure 6, whereas the ESP FLC for the
left side of the vehicle surface is shown in Figure 7.
The ABS algorithm controls the slip by acting on the breaking pressure of each wheel. The ESP
stabilizes the yaw rate by influencing the braking pressure with subtraction from the pressure generated
for the ABS control. Table 5 summarizes the FLC design in this work.
 MF1 
MF1 
MF9  MF5  MF5  MF4  MF4  MF3  MF3  MF2  MF2 
MF1 

When  all  the  design  steps  are  finished,  the  rule  base  FLC  can  be  expressed  in  a 
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 10 of 18
three‐dimensional surface form. The ABS FLC for the front wheels is presented in Figure 6, whereas 
the ESP FLC for the left side of the vehicle surface is shown in Figure 7. 

pABS

μx
λ
 
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 
Figure 6. ABS FLC rule surface for the front wheels. 
Figure 6. ABS FLC rule surface for the front wheels. 10 of 17 

The ABS algorithm controls the slip by acting on the breaking pressure of each wheel. The ESP 
stabilizes  the  yaw  rate  by  influencing  the  braking  pressure  with  subtraction  from  the  pressure 
generated for the ABS control. Table 5 summarizes the FLC design in this work. 
pESPl

ψ δ

 
Figure 7. ESP FLC rule surface for the left side of the vehicle. 
Figure 7. ESP FLC rule surface for the left side of the vehicle.

Table 5. Fuzzy logic controller design conclusion. 
Table 5. Fuzzy logic controller design conclusion.
Parameter  ABS FLC ESP FLC 
Structure 
Parameter MISO 
ABS FLC MIMO 
ESP FLC
Structure Slip λ (9 MFs), 
MISO   Yaw rate ψ (9 MFs), 
MIMO  
Crisp input 
Road condition μx (6 MFs)  Steering wheel angle δ (9 MFs) 
Slip λ (9 MFs), Road condition µx Yaw rate ψ (9 MFs), Steering wheel angle δ
Crisp input Braking pressure left side p ESPl (5 MFs), 
Crisp output  (6 MFs) ABS (8 MFs)
Braking pressure p (9 MFs)
Braking pressure right side p ESPr (5 MFs)
Braking pressure left side pESPl (5 MFs),
Crisp output
Fuzzy conjunction Braking pressure pABS (8
AND = min (λ, μ MFs)
x)  AND = min (ψ, δ) 
Braking pressure right side pESPr (5 MFs)
Fuzzy MFs 
conjunction Linear Symmetric 
AND = min (λ, µx ) Linear Symmetric 
AND = min (ψ, δ)
Inference method 
MFs
Mamdani´s 
Linear Symmetric
Mamdani´s 
Linear Symmetric
Rule‐base  54 Modes Ponens  81 Modes Ponens 
Inference method Mamdani´s Mamdani´s
Implication operation min (pABS)  min (pESPl) ∨ min (pESPr) 
Rule-base 54 Modes Ponens 81 Modes Ponens
Aggregation method max (pABS)  max (pESPl) ∨ max (pESPr) 
Implication operation
Defuzzification  min (pABS )
Geometric center  min (pESPl ) ∨ min (pESPr )
Smallest‐of‐maxima 
Aggregation method max (pABS ) max (pESPl ) ∨ max (pESPr )
4. Simulation Conditions 
Defuzzification Geometric center Smallest-of-maxima

The control algorithm is designed in Automotive Simulation Models™ (ASM) provided by the 
dSPACE®  GmbH  Software  2014‐B  (64‐bit,  Paderborn,  Germany)  and  interacted  with  the 
MATLAB®/Simulink®  R2013b  (64  Bit,  Natick,  MA,  USA).  The  ASM  allows  the  multibody  vehicle 
simulation  procedures.  The  car  model  has  10DOF.  An  overall  software  interface  is  presented  in 
Figure 8. 
During the simulation, the braking processes were conducted on a straight road as well as in 
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 11 of 18

4. Simulation Conditions
The control algorithm is designed in Automotive Simulation Models™ (ASM) provided by
the dSPACE® GmbH Software 2014-B (64-bit, Paderborn, Germany) and interacted with the
MATLAB® /Simulink® R2013b (64 Bit, Natick, MA, USA). The ASM allows the multibody vehicle
simulation procedures. The car model has 10 DOF. An overall software interface is presented in
Figure 8.
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382  11 of 17 

 
Figure 8. Simulation software interface by the dSPACE  GmbH.  ®
Figure 8. Simulation software interface by the dSPACE® GmbH.

Furthermore, the effect of the ABS controller performance can be described with the index of 
During the
performance  ABS simulation, the braking
IP.  The  variable  processes
is  a  ratio  between  were conducted
the  vehicle  on a straight
deceleration  with road
and as well asthe 
without  in
combination with cornering
controller and is found as follows: maneuvers. Different complex maneuvers, such as straight or cornering
braking on a split-µ road surface and straight or cornering with change of the tire–road friction
a ABS as a comparison of the vehicle motion with
IP 
coefficients, were simulated. The results areABS introduced .  (12)
and without the activated controllers. Road variations  askidsuch as dry, wet, and icy surfaces as well as
their First, 
combinations were designed
the  simulation  and simulated
is  dedicated  to  split‐μ toroads. 
prove When 
the ABShalf 
controller
of  the  robustness
road  has  a and its ability
significantly 
to hold the optimal wheel slip in different road conditions.
higher friction coefficient as compared to the other half, a high yaw moment occurs. The driver is not 
The reaction of the ABS controller on the wheel slip characterizes the system adaptability.
able to compensate properly for the yaw dynamics, and the vehicle can spin around the COG. The 
The factor can be expressed in percentage and calculated by the following equation:
corresponding simulation in this study is performed for cornering and straight braking maneuvers.   
For  the  straight  road,  half  wet–half  dry ω and  half  icy–half  wet  surfaces  were  chosen.  For  the 
max − ωmin
ω p − t − p = · 100.
curved road, half dry–half icy and half wet–half dry surface profiles were designed.    (11)
ωmax
Next,  the  model  was  simulated  on  a  curved  road  line  for  different  tire–road  friction 
Furthermore, the effect of the ABS controller performance can be described with the index of
characteristics. The road friction conditions vary during the braking process from icy and dry to wet. 
Afterwards,  ABS
performance . The road 
the  IPsame  variable is a ratio were 
conditions  between the vehicle
applied  deceleration
to  the  with and
straight  road  without
profile.  the
In  this 
controller and is found as follows:
experimentation part the controller robustness is studied.  − a ABS
ABS IP = . (12)
− askid
5. Results 
First, the simulation is dedicated to split-µ roads. When half of the road has a significantly
higher friction coefficient as compared to the other half, a high yaw moment occurs. The driver is
5.1. Study on Controller Functionality 
not able to compensate properly for the yaw dynamics, and the vehicle can spin around the COG.
The first part of the simulation experiments is addressed to the vehicle safety investigation on 
The corresponding simulation in this study is performed for cornering and straight braking maneuvers.
the  split‐μ  surface  profiles.  The  maneuvers  are  simulated  on  straight  and  curved  roads.  For  the 
For the straight road, half wet–half dry and half icy–half wet surfaces were chosen. For the curved
straight braking, the vehicle was accelerated to 100 km/h and after that the emergency braking was 
road, half dry–half icy and half wet–half dry surface profiles were designed.
conducted. For curved road braking the vehicle was accelerated to 65 km/h while the transport is 
Next, the model was simulated on a curved road line for different tire–road friction characteristics.
cornering left. 
The road friction conditions vary during the braking process from icy and dry to wet. Afterwards,
Braking on a curved road with a split‐μ surface is the most extreme situation for vehicle safety, 
the same road conditions were applied to the straight road profile. In this experimentation part the
because the yaw rate is created by the driver while cornering. The left side of the road is dry and the 
controller robustness is studied.
right side is icy in the present instance. The vehicle body and the wheel speed curves are shown in 
Figure 9.   
Before the ABS is activated, the ESP is already reducing the braking pressure from the left side 
of the vehicle (the dry surface). The slip values of the left side wheels are therefore lower compared 
to the right side (Figure 10). Although the left side of the road is dry, the left wheels have less than 10% 
of  the  wheel  slip  values,  because  the  ESP  reduces  the  braking  pressure  from  the  left  half  of  the 
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 12 of 18

5. Results

5.1. Study on Controller Functionality

The first part of the simulation experiments is addressed to the vehicle safety investigation on the
split-µ surface profiles. The maneuvers are simulated on straight and curved roads. For the straight
braking, the vehicle was accelerated to 100 km/h and after that the emergency braking was conducted.
For curved road braking the vehicle was accelerated to 65 km/h while the transport is cornering left.
Braking on a curved road with a split-µ surface is the most extreme situation for vehicle safety,
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382  12 of 17 
because the yaw rate is created by the driver while cornering. The left side of the road is dry and the
Therefore, 
right side isthe 
icy yaw 
in therate  remains 
present almost 
instance. Thezero  during 
vehicle the and
body whole 
thebraking  distance 
wheel speed on  are
curves the shown
cornering 
in
maneuvers. Hence, the driver is able to maintain lateral stability during emergency braking. 
Figure 9.

Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382  12 of 17 

Therefore,  the  yaw  rate  remains  almost  zero  during  the  whole  braking  distance  on  the  cornering 
maneuvers. Hence, the driver is able to maintain lateral stability during emergency braking. 

 
Figure 9. Braking on a curved split‐μ road with a half dry–half icy surface; velocity profile 
Figure 9. Braking on a curved split-µ road with a half dry–half icy surface; velocity profile curves: 1—FL
curves:  1—FL 
wheel velocity, 2—FR wheel 
wheel velocity, 
velocity, 3—RL2—FR 
wheelwheel  velocity, 
velocity, 4—RR 3—RL 
wheelwheel  velocity, 
velocity, 4—RR 
5—vehicle wheel 
velocity.
velocity, 5—vehicle velocity. 
Before the ABS is activated, the ESP is already reducing the braking pressure from the left side of
the vehicle (the dry surface). The slip values of the left side wheels are therefore lower   compared to
the right sideFigure 9. Braking on a curved split‐μ road with a half dry–half icy surface; velocity profile 
(Figure 10). Although the left side of the road is dry, the left wheels have less than 10% of
the wheel slipcurves: 
values,1—FL  wheel 
because thevelocity,  2—FR  wheel 
ESP reduces velocity, 
the braking 3—RL  wheel 
pressure velocity, 
from the 4—RR 
left half wheel 
of the vehicle.
velocity, 5—vehicle velocity. 
The driver, thus, is able to control the car path to follow the road.

 
Figure  10.  Braking  on  a  curved  split‐μ  road  with  a  half  dry–half  icy  surface;  slip  profile 
curves: 1—FL wheel slip, 2—FR wheel slip, 3—RL wheel slip, 4—RR wheel slip. 

 
Figure  10.  Braking  on  a  curved  split‐μ  road  with  a  half  dry–half  icy  surface;  slip  profile 
Figure 10. Braking on a curved split-µ road with a half dry–half icy surface; slip profile curves: 1—FL
curves: 1—FL wheel slip, 2—FR wheel slip, 3—RL wheel slip, 4—RR wheel slip. 
wheel slip, 2—FR wheel slip, 3—RL wheel slip, 4—RR wheel slip.
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 13 of 18

The dry surface has a higher friction coefficient than the icy road. In this case, the yaw rate is
extremely high due to the left cornering. The yaw rate grows after the start of the braking process
(Figure 11). However, the ESP reacts very fast and the braking pressure is minimized rapidly.   Therefore,
Figure  10. 
the yaw rate remains Braking 
almost on  a 
zero curved the
during split‐μ 
wholeroad braking
with  a  half  dry–half 
distance onicy 
thesurface;  slip  profile 
cornering maneuvers.
curves: 1—FL wheel slip, 2—FR wheel slip, 3—RL wheel slip, 4—RR wheel slip. 
Hence, the driver is able to maintain lateral stability during emergency braking.

 
Figure 11. Figure 
Braking11. on
Braking  on  a split-µ
a curved curved road
split‐μ 
withroad  with dry–half
a half a  half dry–half  icy  surface 
icy surface profileprofile 
angleangle 
curves:
curves: 1—steering wheel angle δ, 2—yaw rate ψ. 
1—steering wheel angle δ, 2—yaw rate ψ.

When the controller is switched off (Figure 11, dashed lines), the vehicle spins left. The driver
turns the steering wheel to the right until the maximum allowed angle. Nevertheless, the high yaw
rate in the opposite direction makes the car spin.
The simulation results with other split-µ road maneuvers are introduced in Table 6, the plots are
represented in Figures S1–S9. The ESP safety assistance performance is also compared to the same
condition simulations with the turned-off controller. The maximum yaw rate ψmax does not exceed
26◦ /s. When the controller is turned off the yaw rate is very high, which makes the car spin around its
COG even if the driver tries to keep the vehicle following the road. The braking distance s and the
average body deceleration −aaverage for no control simulation are not introduced in the table, because
in every case, when the controller is turned off, the car spins.

Table 6. Controller functionality results.

Criterion Braking Performance ABS Control Performance ESP Control Performance

δmax (◦ ) ψmax (◦ /s)
−aaverage ωp-t-p
s (m) λaverage (%) Controlled/ Controlled/
Type (m/s2 ) (%)
No Control No Control
FL 18.41 46.91
Straight split-µ FR 13.97 46.10
47.16 −4.25 175.00/449.96 −16.86/−268.52
wet/dry RL 14.20 45.37
RR 14.20 45.61
FL 12.74 32.51
Straight split-µ FR 7.34 27.63
102.51 −3.31 60.16/450 −7.08/−313.73
icy/wet RL 10.62 24.85
RR 5.10 18.15
FL 4.71 28.26
Cornering split-µ FR 15.96 35.04
44.74 −3.14 −182.46/−450 25.49/−180.71
dry/icy RL 4.40 23.24
RR 13.05 28.58
FL 19.29 49.36
Cornering split-µ FR 14.32 46.95
20.19 −5.23 363.52/450 −15.42/−78.78
wet/dry RL 17.30 48.16
RR 13.77 46.49
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 14 of 18

In short, the comparison simulation, where the controller was turned on and turned off, shows
the importance of the proposed solution in terms of vehicle safety. Different complex maneuvers
were studied. The driver is able to remain on the road, following the path. When the controller is
turned off, steering is impossible and, the vehicle starts to spin around the COG, causing unfortunate
car accidents.

5.2. Study on Controller Robustness

The next simulation study is devoted to an investigation of the controller robustness on curved
and straight road profiles. The road surfaces are even. However, they are different for the whole
braking distance. Again, in cornering maneuvers the vehicle is accelerated to 65 km/h in a straight
line—to 100 km/h. Afterwards, emergency braking is performed.
The vehicle body and the vehicle wheels velocity plots for the varying road conditions on a
straight road maneuvers are introduced in Figure 12. The vehicle starts braking on a dry road with
transition to a wet surface. The car finishes braking on icy asphalt. The vehicle changes the deceleration
according to the tire–road adhesive characteristics. The algorithm is able to recognize the road surface
and, according to the obtained information supply, appropriate pressure to maintain efficient braking
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 
is applied.
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382  14 of 17 
14 of 17 

 
Figure 12. Braking on a straight road with dry–wet–icy surfaces profile speed curves: 1—FL 
Figure 12. Braking on a straight road with dry–wet–icy surfaces profile speed curves: 1—FL 
Figure 12. Braking on a straight road with dry–wet–icy surfaces profile speed curves: 1—FL wheel
wheel  velocity, 
wheel 
velocity, 2—FR wheel velocity,2—FR 
velocity,  3—RLwheel 
2—FR  wheelvelocity, 
wheel  velocity,3—RL 
velocity,  4—RRwheel 
3—RL  wheelvelocity, 
wheel  velocity, 4—RR 
velocity,  4—RR  wheel 
wheel 
5—vehicle velocity, 
velocity, 
velocity.
5—vehicle velocity. 
5—vehicle velocity. 

The The slip curves for the each wheel are shown in Figure 13. No wheel lock has been obtained. 
slip curves for the each wheel are shown in Figure 13. No wheel lock has been obtained.
The controller holds
The  controller  thethe 
holds  optimal slip
optimal  for
slip  each
for  each wheel
wheel on
on  every roadsurface. 
every  road  surface.The 
The wheel
wheel  pressure
pressure 
distribution aims to obtain an optimal wheel slip. 
distribution aims to obtain an optimal wheel slip.

 
Figure 13. Braking on a straight road with dry–wet–icy surfaces profile slip curves: 1—FL 
Figure 13. Braking on a straight road with dry–wet–icy surfaces profile slip curves: 1—FL 
Figure 13. Braking on a straight road with dry–wet–icy surfaces profile slip curves: 1—FL wheel slip,
wheel slip, 2—FR wheel slip, 3—RL wheel slip, 4—RR wheel slip. 
wheel slip, 2—FR wheel slip, 3—RL wheel slip, 4—RR wheel slip. 
2—FR wheel slip, 3—RL wheel slip, 4—RR wheel slip.

To conclude the wheel slip control robustness and compare it to the theoretical energy efficient 
values  from  Figure  2,  Table  7  is  introduced.  The  simulation  wheel  slip  results  are  taken  as  the 
average  numbers.  It  can  be  concluded  that  the  controller  is  able  to  maintain  the  optimal  slip  to 
maintain energy‐efficient braking. 
In cornering maneuvers, as the vehicle is turning left, the wheel slip values for the left side of 
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 15 of 18

Other braking results for the maneuvers with even road profiles studied in this paper are
introduced in Figures S10–S17. To conclude the wheel slip control robustness and compare it to
the theoretical energy efficient values from Figure 2, Table 7 is introduced. The simulation wheel slip
results are taken as the average numbers. It can be concluded that the controller is able to maintain the
optimal slip to maintain energy-efficient braking.

Table 7. Controller robustness results.

Criterion Braking Performance ABS Control Performance ESP Control Performance

s (m) (m/s2 )
−aaverage δmax (◦ ) ψmax (◦ /s)
ωp-t-p
Controlled/ Controlled/ ABSIP λaverage (%) Controlled/ Controlled/
Type (%)
No Control No Control No Control No Control
FL 11.45–16.62 34.76
Cornering even FR 14.27–17.79 37.88
21.59/30.88 −6.75/−3.48 1.94 103.55/450 10.82/−27.89
wet to dry RL 9.94–16.94 32.93
RR 11.61–17.90 35.44
FL 19.14–3.68–9.918 50.25
Cornering even FR 19.93–9.30–11.07 50.96
31.28/31.33 −3.69/−2.99 1.23 160.05/450 10.61/−20.72
dry to icy to wet RL 17.34–2.94–8.93 48.04
RR 17.85–1.37–11.16 48.86
FL 10.01–18.99–14.16 28.64
Straight even icy FR 18.49–18.99–14.13 28.64
88.49/140.04 −4.29/−2.36 1.82 0/0 0/0
to dry to wet RL 7.73–17.13–12.33 19.58
RR 7.73–17.13–12.33 19.59
FL 19.71–14.24–9.30 55.66
Straight even dry FR 19.71–14.24–9.30 55.66
62.51/140.04 −3.85/−1.97 1.95 0/0 0/0
to wet to icy RL 18.05–11.56–7.68 48.52
RR 18.05–11.56–7.68 48.53

In cornering maneuvers, as the vehicle is turning left, the wheel slip values for the left side of
the vehicle are smaller compared to the right side. The difference is caused by the ESP assistance.
In addition, even when the road surface is even, the yaw rate appears when the vehicle starts to
brake. However, the driver reacts by controlling the steering wheel and the car remains on the road.
Therefore, the robustness of the proposed controller is investigated through several examples of
different complex maneuvers.
The braking and ESP performance results on the same roads without controllers are also
introduced in Table 7. It is clear that the braking distances without the controllers are longer for every
considered case. Due to the wheels’ blockage, the average deceleration results (−aaverage ) are lower.
When the controllers are turned off, the driver rotates the steering wheel as far as possible to
remain on the road while conducting the cornering maneuvers. The car, however, drives off the road
without controller assistance. When the controllers are turned on, contrariwise, it is enough for the
driver to slightly control the vehicle steering wheel to remain on the road.
All in all, the ABS FLC is able to recognize the tire–road adhesive coefficient and supply the
appropriate braking pressure to maintain energy-efficient deceleration. The simulation results of the
controller on the straight and cornering profiles prove the controller’s robustness.

6. Discussion and Conclusions

This paper describes the FLC algorithm for vehicle safety assistance control. The ABS and the ESP
integration introduced in this work provides energy-efficient and robust responses to different road
surfaces and curved braking performance. In order to design a robust FLC, the tire–road adhesive
coefficients versus tire slip curves for dry, damp, wet, and icy roads were plotted first (Figure 2).
The studied vehicle model was parameterized according to the SUV parameters. The proposed
solution is suitable for the studied SUV model.
A combination of ABS and ESP controllers both based on FLC theory is introduced. Each wheel
has an independent controller. The simulation results conducted on different complex maneuvers
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 16 of 18

involving curved road profiles and split-µ road surfaces as well as varying road friction coefficients
prove the controller robustness. The algorithm assists the driver with steering. Thus, a driver with
average reaction times is able to follow the road during emergency heavy braking.
The simulation results introduced in Section 5 prove the FLC robustness to varying road surfaces
and split-µ profiles. Moreover, optimal slip braking on even road profiles is maintained, providing
energy-efficient braking. Comparing the research results to other intelligent computation control
algorithms introduced in Section 1, the current study offers several novel proposals for the vehicle
dynamics and safety control fields.
First, the proposed controller does not require a reference error and change of error input variables
as in [10–12,15] Instead, the controller covers the whole braking process stable area. The human
experience containing rule-base block provides a suitable pressure to hold an optimal for every
studied road surface slip value. Therefore, the dependence on the constant reference value, which is
unpredictable in reality, is avoided.
Second, in most of the previously proposed cases, as for instance in [10–12,16], braking on a
straight even surface excludes the lateral dynamics influence on the controller, and, thus, on the
vehicle safety performance. The simulation results in Section 5 show that the lateral dynamics during
cornering maneuvers and on split-µ road profiles braking must be taken into consideration as they are
essential in car spin and roll-over avoidance. Otherwise, the ABS and ESP safety assistance cannot
be ensured.
Third, the simple quarter-car model studied in [9,18] is not enough to prove the controller
productivity and robustness. In reality, the four-wheel vehicle model represents a more complex
control task. Consequently, the vehicle model examined in this paper has an advantage over other
similar works.
Finally, regarding the ESP performance, most researchers [20,21,23–25] limit their results with a
simple line change maneuver. There were no publications found testing the ABS and ESP designed
with FLC on a cornering split-µ road profile, as has been done in the current work.
In short, the results obtained from the current research are as follows:

• The ESP and ABS FLC control integration to obtain energy-efficient braking performance.
• The controls safety and robustness in different kinds of complex maneuvers is studied.
• Use of a complex 10 DOF vehicle model in the controller simulation.

The main drawback of the presented work, however, is its restriction by the numerical simulation.
In the PC software simulation, the real vehicle dynamics and physical behavior are missing. A computer
simulation does not completely solve the problem.
Future research covers the experimentation on the HIL brakes test bench. Moreover, the controller
will be designed and applied on a four in-wheel-motor drive passenger electric vehicle providing the
torque-base brake solution to study recuperative braking.
Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/6/12/382/s1,
Figure S1: Straight split-µ road with a half wet-half dry surface profile velocity curves, Figure S2: Straight
split-µ road with a half wet-half dry surface profile wheel slip curves, Figure S3: Straight split-µ road with a half
wet-half dry surface profile angle curves, Figure S4: Straight split-µ road with a half icy-half wet surface profile
velocity curves, Figure S5: Straight split-µ road with a half icy-half wet surface profile wheel slip curves, Figure S6:
Straight split-µ road with a half icy-half wet surface profile angle curves, Figure S7: Curved split-µ road with a
half wet-half dry surface profile velocity curves, Figure S8: Curved split-µ road with a half wet-half dry surface
profile wheel slip curves, Figure S9: Curved split-µ road with a half wet-half dry surface profile angle curves,
Figure S10: Curved even road with wet-dry surface profile velocity curves, Figure S11: Curved even road with
wet-dry surface profile wheel slip curves, Figure S12: Curved even road with wet-dry surface profile angle curves,
Figure S13: Curved even road with dry-icy-wet surface profile velocity curves, Figure S14: Curved even road with
dry-icy-wet surface profile wheel slip curves, Figure S15: Curved even road with dry-icy-wet surface profile angle
curves, Figure S16: Straight even road with icy-dry-wet surface profile velocity curves, Figure S17: Straight even
road with icy-dry-wet surface profile wheel slip curves.

Acknowledgments: This research work was supported by the Deutschen Bundesstiftung Umwelt (DBU) exchange
scholarship program and the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 17 of 18

Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 645736. We acknowledge support for the Article Processing
Charge from the German Research Foundation and the Open Access Publication Fund of the Technische
Universität Ilmenau.
Author Contributions: Andrei Aksjonov conceived designed and performed the experiments. Klaus Augsburg
and Valery Vodovozov analyzed the data; all the authors prepared the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Post, W.; Koch-Dücker, H.-J.; Papert, U. Car braking systems. Antilock braking system. In Brakes, Brake Control
and Driver Assistance Systems: Function, Regulation and Components; Reif, K., Ed.; Springer: Friedrichshafen,
Germany, 2014; pp. 28–40, 74–94.
2. Ivanov, V. A review of fuzzy methods in automotive engineering applications. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 2015, 7,
1–10. [CrossRef]
3. Takahashi, H.; Ishikawa, Y. Antiskid Brake Control System Based on Fuzzy Inference. U.S. Patent 4,842,344,
27 June 1989.
4. Mauer, G.F. A fuzzy logic controller for an ABS braking system. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 1998, 3, 381–388.
[CrossRef]
5. Klaus, K.; Hasemann, M. An embedded fuzzy anti-slippage system for heavy duty off road vehicles. Inf. Sci.
1995, 4, 1–27. [CrossRef]
6. Passino, K.M.; Yurkovich, S. Fuzzy Control; Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.: Menlo Park, California, CA,
USA, 1998; pp. 317–413.
7. Layne, J.R.; Passino, K.M.; Yurkovich, S. Fuzzy learning control for antiskid braking systems. IEEE Trans.
Control Syst. Technol. 1993, 2, 122–129. [CrossRef]
8. Dai, C.L.; Xu, L.J. The Simulation Research of Automobile ABS System Based on Fuzzy Theory.
In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Intelligent Transportation, Big Data and Smart
City (ICITBS), Halong Bay, Vietnam, 19–20 December 2015; pp. 922–926.
9. Du, H.; Li, W.; Zhang, Y. Tracking Control of Wheel Slip Ratio with Velocity Estimation for Vehicle Anti-Lock
Braking System. In Proceedings of the 2015 27th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC), Qingdao,
China, 23–25 May 2015; pp. 1900–1905.
10. Raesian, N.; Khajehpour, N.; Yaghoobi, M. A New Approach in Anti-lock Braking System (ABS) Based on
Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Self-tuning PID Controller. In Proceedings of the 2011 2nd International Conference
on Control, Instrumentation and Automation (ICCIA), Shiraz, Iran, 27–29 December 2011; pp. 530–535.
11. Kejun, J.; Chengye, L. Application Study of Fuzzy PID Control with S-function on Automotive ABS.
In Proceedings of the 2010 International Conference on Future Information Technology and Management
Engineering (FITME), Changzhou, China, 9–10 October 2010; pp. 467–470.
12. Jidu, H.; Yongjun, Z.; Gang, W. Research on Vehicle Anti-braking System Control Algorithm Based on
Fuzzy Immune Adaptive PID Control. In Proceedings of the 2012 Third International Conference on Digital
Manufacturing and Automation (ICDMA), Guilin, China, 31 July–2 August 2012; pp. 723–726.
13. Lin, C.-M.; Li, H.-Y. Intelligent hybrid control system design for antilock braking systems using
self-organizing function-link fuzzy cerebellar model articulation controller. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 2013, 21,
1044–1055. [CrossRef]
14. Mirzaei, A.; Moallem, M.; Dehkordi, B.M.; Fahimi, B. Design of an optimal fuzzy controller for antilock
braking system. IEEE Trans. Vehicul. Technol. 2006, 55, 1725–1730. [CrossRef]
15. Yonggon, L.; Zak, S.H. Designing a genetic neural fuzzy antilock-brake-system controller. IEEE Trans.
Evol. Comp. 2002, 6, 198–211. [CrossRef]
16. Wang, W.-Y.; Li, I.H.; Chen, M.-C.; Su, S.-F.; Hsu, S.-B. Dynamic slip-ratio estimation and control of antilock
braking systems using an observer-based direct adaptive fuzzy-neural controller. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.
2009, 56, 746–1756.
17. Cabrera, J.A.; Ortiz, A.; Castello, J.J.; Simon, A. A fuzzy logic control for antilock braking system integrated
in the IMMa tyre test bench. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2005, 54, 1937–1949. [CrossRef]
18. Khatun, P.; Bingham, C.M.; Schofield, N.; Mellor, P.H. Application of fuzzy control algorithms for electric
vehicle antilock braking-traction control systems. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2003, 52, 1356–1364. [CrossRef]
Appl. Sci. 2016, 6, 382 18 of 18

19. Cao, C.-T.; Becker, R.; Belzner, U.; Moeller, T.-W.; Lieberoth-Leden, B. System for Controlling Brake Pressure
Based on Fuzzy Logic Using Steering Angle and Yaw Speed. U.S. Patent 5,634,698, 3 June 1997.
20. Zhou, H.; Chen, H.; Ren, B.; Zhao, H. Yaw Stability Control for In-wheel-motored Electric Vehicle with a
Fuzzy PID Method. In Proceedings of the 27th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (2015 CCDC),
Qingdao, China, 23–25 May 2015; pp. 1876–1881.
21. Wei, Z.; Guizhen, Y.; Jian, W.; Tianshu, S.; Xiangyang, X. Self-tuning Fuzzy PID Applied to Direct Yaw
Moment Control for Vehicle Stability. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Electronic
Measurement & Instruments, 2009, (ICEMI ’09), Beijing, China, 16–19 August 2009; pp. 2-257–2-261.
22. Tahami, F.; Kazemi, R.; Farhanghi, S. A novel driver assist stability system for all-wheel-drive electric vehicle.
IEEE Trans. Vehicul. Technol. 2003, 52, 683–692. [CrossRef]
23. Geng, C.; Mostefai, L.; Denai, M.; Hori, Y. Direct yaw-moment control of an in-wheel-motored electric vehicle
based on body slip angle fuzzy observer. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2009, 56, 1411–1419. [CrossRef]
24. Oudghiri, M.; Chadli, M.; Hajjaji, A.E. Vehicle Yaw Control Using a Robust H∞ Observer-based Fuzzy
Controller Design. In Proceedings of the 2007 46th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, New Orleans,
LA, USA, 12–14 December 2007; pp. 3895–3900.
25. Wu, Y.; Song, D.; Hou, Z.; Yuan, X. A Fuzzy Control Method to Improve Vehicle Yaw Stability Based
on Integrated Yaw Moment Control and Active Front Steering. In Proceedings of the 2007 International
Conference on Mechatronics and Automation, Harbin, China, 5–8 August 2007; pp. 1508–1512.

© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).